Qt-jambi-interest Archive, August 2006
Feedback after a brief use
Message 1 in thread
Hi
First of all, I have to say that I was really enthusiastic when I
heard about QtJambi, so I tried yesterday to do a really simple test
program ... (a window with 5 labels in it :D)
I have also read most of the other messages so I will start by what
has already been said :
* Someone asked for a Qt perspective, I agree with that, a Qt
perspective with all the Qt views already set would be nice and not
hard to do I think :)
* Some people complain against the file named Ui_* ... I also agree,
that would be nice to have filenames in the "java way". So Ui* or *Ui
or no "Ui" at all.
* The bug with juic which needs the ui files at the root of the
project is also annoying, but I've seen it has been taken care of.
Now some other things I noticed :
* On your Eclipse plugin installation page, it's not obvious that the
PATH variable should point to the "bin" directory. For instance I
installed QtJambi at C:\qtjambi-win-preview and I thought that was the
path I had to put in the PATH variable whereas I needed to put
C:\qtjambi-win-preview\bin . I think that would be nice to change that
on the image provided (where it's written
path_to_my_QtJambi_installation).
* Something that would also be nice is that instead of creating an
"anonymous" file with the extension .ui, create some specific template
ui files, like when you start the "normal" QtDesigner, you have the
choice between "Dialog with buttons bottom", "Dialog with buttons
right", "Main Window", "Widget". Especially because I didn't find the
way to create a QDialog or a QWindow by using the Eclipse designer
plugin.
* And also another thing which is annoying is that when a .ui file is
open in the editor, you can't move it or delete it. That would be nice
to allow that or to find a way to tell before it starts (especially
for moving the file, because you have 2 copies at the end).
That's everything I have to say for the moment, as I didn't really get
into it yet. But I think it is going the good way.
Guillaume Mouron
Message 2 in thread
Hi, Guillame.
Guillaume Mouron wrote:
> * Someone asked for a Qt perspective, I agree with that, a Qt
> perspective with all the Qt views already set would be nice and not
> hard to do I think :)
Yes, that's a good idea, and a Qt Jambi perspective is on our schedule.
It will however not be done before the third technical preview.
> * Some people complain against the file named Ui_* ... I also agree,
> that would be nice to have filenames in the "java way". So Ui* or *Ui
> or no "Ui" at all.
We've seen some comments on this, so it's something we will reconsider.
What would be the preferred way for you out of your three suggestions?
The reason we wanted a prefix for the name is to avoid naming collisions
(which could lead to possible overwriting of files.) The underscore
makes it less likely that anyone will have a hand written class of the
same name.
> * The bug with juic which needs the ui files at the root of the
> project is also annoying, but I've seen it has been taken care of.
Yes, that bug has been fixed for the next technical preview, and the
juic integration has in general become a lot more flexible.
> * On your Eclipse plugin installation page, it's not obvious that the
> PATH variable should point to the "bin" directory. For instance I
> installed QtJambi at C:\qtjambi-win-preview and I thought that was the
> path I had to put in the PATH variable whereas I needed to put
> C:\qtjambi-win-preview\bin . I think that would be nice to change that
> on the image provided (where it's written
> path_to_my_QtJambi_installation).
I agree. We will look into having this fixed.
> * Something that would also be nice is that instead of creating an
> "anonymous" file with the extension .ui, create some specific template
> ui files, like when you start the "normal" QtDesigner, you have the
> choice between "Dialog with buttons bottom", "Dialog with buttons
> right", "Main Window", "Widget". Especially because I didn't find the
> way to create a QDialog or a QWindow by using the Eclipse designer
> plugin.
A "New Form" wizard is included in the next release of the Eclipse
integration, and it has the familiar list of templates from designer.
> * And also another thing which is annoying is that when a .ui file is
> open in the editor, you can't move it or delete it. That would be nice
> to allow that or to find a way to tell before it starts (especially
> for moving the file, because you have 2 copies at the end).
>
I agree that this is a good suggestion, and we have made a note of it.
However, I didn't quite understand what you meant by "find a way to tell
before it starts." Could you elaborate on that part?
Thank you for all your suggestions and comments. Have a nice day!
-- Eskil
Message 3 in thread
Eskil A. Blomfeldt wrote:
> We've seen some comments on this, so it's something we will
> reconsider. What would be the preferred way for you out of your three
> suggestions? The reason we wanted a prefix for the name is to avoid
> naming collisions (which could lead to possible overwriting of files.)
> The underscore makes it less likely that anyone will have a hand
> written class of the same name.
>
Couldn't this be solved by letting the programmer choose which class
name she/he wants on the generated class? In this way you can choose any
naming convention you want? An option in the juic generator?
Helge Fredriksen
Message 4 in thread
Helge Fredriksen wrote:
> Eskil A. Blomfeldt wrote:
>
>> We've seen some comments on this, so it's something we will
>> reconsider. What would be the preferred way for you out of your three
>> suggestions? The reason we wanted a prefix for the name is to avoid
>> naming collisions (which could lead to possible overwriting of
>> files.) The underscore makes it less likely that anyone will have a
>> hand written class of the same name.
>>
> Couldn't this be solved by letting the programmer choose which class
> name she/he wants on the generated class? In this way you can choose
> any naming convention you want? An option in the juic generator?
>
Hi, Helge.
Yes, although I'm not immediately sure what the best solution might be,
as we want something which is simple and intuitive out of the box. We'll
look at different ways of making the naming conventions more
customizable or atleast more Java-friendly and check in with the mailing
list once we have something concrete.
-- Eskil
Message 5 in thread
Hum, I'm silly I have just seen that I didn't answer on the mailing
list but directly to Eskil ...
So I resend my mail (sorry if you have 2 copies ...)
On 8/28/06, Eskil A. Blomfeldt <eblomfel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi, Guillame.
It's GuillAUMe (french name ;))
>
> Guillaume Mouron wrote:
>
> > * Someone asked for a Qt perspective, I agree with that, a Qt
> > perspective with all the Qt views already set would be nice and not
> > hard to do I think :)
>
>
> Yes, that's a good idea, and a Qt Jambi perspective is on our schedule.
> It will however not be done before the third technical preview.
ok :)
> > * Some people complain against the file named Ui_* ... I also agree,
> > that would be nice to have filenames in the "java way". So Ui* or *Ui
> > or no "Ui" at all.
>
>
> We've seen some comments on this, so it's something we will reconsider.
> What would be the preferred way for you out of your three suggestions?
> The reason we wanted a prefix for the name is to avoid naming collisions
> (which could lead to possible overwriting of files.) The underscore
> makes it less likely that anyone will have a hand written class of the
> same name.
>
Actually I don't know :p By the way, I'm still a student and even if I
have developped a lot in java through my different internships, I'm
not sure I am aware of the "standards" :)
But when I try to write the classname with let's say : MyForm.ui
It would give :
* UiMyForm.java
* MyFormUi.java
* MyForm.java
I think I prefer the 2 last ones, so if you *absolutely* want to add
something, I would prefer MyFormUi ... But as already requested, a
field in the configuration interface would be just nice. Maybe even
ask the package where it should be generated ?
> > * The bug with juic which needs the ui files at the root of the
> > project is also annoying, but I've seen it has been taken care of.
>
>
> Yes, that bug has been fixed for the next technical preview, and the
> juic integration has in general become a lot more flexible.
>
Great
> > * On your Eclipse plugin installation page, it's not obvious that the
> > PATH variable should point to the "bin" directory. For instance I
> > installed QtJambi at C:\qtjambi-win-preview and I thought that was the
> > path I had to put in the PATH variable whereas I needed to put
> > C:\qtjambi-win-preview\bin . I think that would be nice to change that
> > on the image provided (where it's written
> > path_to_my_QtJambi_installation).
>
>
> I agree. We will look into having this fixed.
>
good
> > * Something that would also be nice is that instead of creating an
> > "anonymous" file with the extension .ui, create some specific template
> > ui files, like when you start the "normal" QtDesigner, you have the
> > choice between "Dialog with buttons bottom", "Dialog with buttons
> > right", "Main Window", "Widget". Especially because I didn't find the
> > way to create a QDialog or a QWindow by using the Eclipse designer
> > plugin.
>
>
> A "New Form" wizard is included in the next release of the Eclipse
> integration, and it has the familiar list of templates from designer.
>
ok
> > * And also another thing which is annoying is that when a .ui file is
> > open in the editor, you can't move it or delete it. That would be nice
> > to allow that or to find a way to tell before it starts (especially
> > for moving the file, because you have 2 copies at the end).
> >
> I agree that this is a good suggestion, and we have made a note of it.
> However, I didn't quite understand what you meant by "find a way to tell
> before it starts." Could you elaborate on that part?
>
When I talk about "a way to tell before it starts", that would be when
you click on "refactor >> move ...", that there is a check made on
whether it is possible to move the file or not, with a error message
if not. So you know it directly and you don't have 2 copies of the
file. I don't know if it is possible though :)
> Thank you for all your suggestions and comments. Have a nice day!
>
>
> -- Eskil
>
>
Have a nice day too.
Message 6 in thread
Hi, Guillaume.
Guillaume Mouron wrote:
> On 8/28/06, Eskil A. Blomfeldt <eblomfel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Guillame.
>
>
> It's GuillAUMe (french name ;))
Sorry =)
> I think I prefer the 2 last ones, so if you *absolutely* want to add
> something, I would prefer MyFormUi ... But as already requested, a
> field in the configuration interface would be just nice. Maybe even
> ask the package where it should be generated ?
Yes, I think our solution will be to make this configurable, so people
can remove and change the prefix if they prefer.
> When I talk about "a way to tell before it starts", that would be when
> you click on "refactor >> move ...", that there is a check made on
> whether it is possible to move the file or not, with a error message
> if not. So you know it directly and you don't have 2 copies of the
> file. I don't know if it is possible though :)
I agree, this is a little annoying. We've put it on our schedule to have
the plugin integrate better with Eclipse file operations. Thanks for the
report :-)
-- Eskil
